E.D. Study Examines Chelsea's Value As School-Reform Model

From the outset of their involvement in Chelsea, Boston University
officials have viewed the project as a potential national model for
urban school reform.

A new federal study of the first year of the partnership raises a
host of fundamental questions about the project that the study's
authors believe have implications for school reformers nationwide.

The study was conducted by Pelavin Associates of Washington, D.C.,
for the U.S. Education Department, at the request of B.U.

It commends the university for its "family schools" approach, for
beginning "a broad range of activities'' on behalf of Chelsea's
students, and for hiring Diana Lam, who resigned her position as
superintendent last spring to run briefly for mayor of Boston.

The B.u. management team Was less successful during the 1989-90
school year in raising money to support the project--falling 27 percent
behind its goal of raising $3 million--and in establishing a good
working rapport with the community, the study says.

Theodore Sharp, chairman of B.U.'S Chelsea management team, said the
report "did a decent job on our strengths and weaknesses."

In an appendix to the report, the researchers ponder the
implications of the lessons learned during the first year of the reform
effort.

For example, although B.U. officials pride themselves on
concentrating on issues like curriculum . and students' readiness to
begin school, the study warns that "process considerations" are just as
important as substantive programs during the initial stages of a major
change.

"This is particularly true if the initial agreement is born in
conflict," the study says, "and when the mainstays of the district and
the community--in this case, the teachers and Hispanic leaders-may be
among the original and strongest opponents, whose support must
eventually be won over to achieve success."

The authors also wondered whether:

An outside entity would have
been willing to provide support without assuming control of the school
system, given Chelsea's "patronage and lack of administrative
capacity."

The university will be able to build "internal capacity
and ownership" among teachers and administrators to sustain the
programs on their own.

A family-school approach can succeed without
stimulating the city's economy and building support for education among
business.

The B.U./Chelsea partnership will continue to serve as a
catalyst for organizing parents and the community and eventually result
in the transfer of political power to elected officials who are more
representative of Chelsea's diversity.

The results of the partnership
will justify elected officials' decision to relinquish control of the
system.

Vol. 11, Issue 04, Page 16

Published in Print: September 25, 1991, as E.D. Study Examines Chelsea's Value As School-Reform Model

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.